“Most people browse on their phones now” doesn’t make PCs obsolete; it just means people use different devices for different purposes. My microwave doesn’t become obsolete because I can heat food in an oven 😭.
I agree consoles are more convenient and standardized. I’m questioning whether that convenience alone remains worth it if PlayStation becomes more expensive, digital-only, and increasingly shares its library with PC.
Those are fair advantages today, especially price and convenience, but my argument is about what happens if those advantages continue shrinking. I never said a $350 used PS5 costs as much as a new PC. I’m asking whether PlayStation remains the better value if future consoles become significantly more expensive, lose physical media, and increasingly share their games with PC.
Consoles are simpler, but modern PC gaming isn’t constant tinkering for everyone—you can connect a controller, launch a game, and play. Exclusives are probably PlayStation’s strongest remaining advantage, although Sony releasing more games on PC weakens that distinction over time.
Also, whether Sony will “have trouble” is a separate question. I’m discussing the value offered to consumers, not predicting that Sony will go bankrupt.
People complain because companies respond to consumer feedback genius. If everyone just 'accepted it and moved on,' we'd never get better policies or more consumer-friendly options. You may not care about digital ownership, but others do. The question is, why do you care what other people think unless you're just some boot licker.
@PlayStation Don't get too attached. In a few years they'll tell us physical fight sticks are outdated and it's time to embrace the all-digital Fight Stick Experience
@xMBGx I'm losing confidence. It feels like Sony is prioritizing control over consumer ownership. If the future is digital-only, I want stronger ownership rights and preservation, not fewer choices.
I'm talking about the direction Sony is heading. If future PlayStations become digital-only, continue getting more expensive, and use the same licensing model as PC, the value proposition changes. At that point, why buy the less capable device instead of a PC that can do everything a console does and much more?
I think the "PCs are too complicated" argument is exaggerated. You're acting like using a gaming PC is operating a spaceship when, for most people, it's install Steam, download a game, and play. Consoles are simpler, sure—but if PlayStation is moving toward digital-only, using the same licensing model as PC, and the price gap keeps shrinking, why would I choose the less capable device? Sony seems to be adopting more of the PC model anyway. At least a PC can game, work, browse, and do a lot more than just play games.
Damn, after owning a Switch, Xbox, PS5, and a gaming PC, I just found out I'm a fake gamer because I think consumers should keep physical media. Guess I'll turn in my gamer card.
@man_terrific@TimoTweetss Whether most people hook a PC to a TV isn't my point. My point is that if both are digital licenses, why choose the less capable device once the price gap gets small?
@John7nxp@TimoTweetss PCs are one of the biggest gaming platforms in the world. My point is that if PlayStation goes digital-only, what advantage does it have over a PC besides a simpler setup?
Exclusives are becoming timed exclusives. Sony has already ported God of War, Spider-Man, Horizon, Ghost of Tsushima, The Last of Us, Ratchet & Clank, and others to PC. If they're moving in that direction while also removing physical media, what unique value is left besides waiting less time
That's a fair point, and consoles generally do have fewer cheaters. But that's an argument for consoles in general—not for PlayStation specifically if it becomes digital-only. If PlayStation removes physical media and I'm buying digital licenses either way, why wouldn't I just get a PC that gives me more freedom, lower game prices, mod support, and backwards compatibility? Anti-cheat alone doesn't outweigh giving up ownership and consumer choice.
Convenience is one advantage, but that's not what I'm asking. If PlayStation becomes digital-only, you lose physical ownership, used games, lending, and competition from retailers. At that point, if I'm buying digital licenses either way, why wouldn't I just buy a PC that gives me more freedom and a larger game library?
@EricRhoade51990@TimoTweetss Cheaper is only an advantage if it stays significantly cheaper. If we're talking about an $800–$1,000+ digital-only console, then I'm going to compare it to a PC. And Sony's exclusives are increasingly making their way to PC anyway.
@The_Heretic1111@TimoTweetss Nice straw man. I never claimed physical media was the only advantage. I'm asking whether the remaining advantages justify a digital-only console, especially if it's approaching PC prices.
I have a gaming PC, and I think the 'constant tinkering' argument is exaggerated. But that's not even my point. If PlayStation is going digital-only, then I'm dealing with the same digital licensing issues as PC. So if consoles are approaching PC prices (which arguably they are), what's the advantage of buying a PlayStation instead of a PC? At least a PC can do much more than just gaming.